Lexical Contextualism: The Abélard Syndrome
نویسندگان
چکیده
The term contextualism is used in linguistics to refer to approaches that are based on the following credo: linguistic entities cannot be considered outside contexts of use as it is only in context that they do make sense. Contextualism has always existed (at least, since antiquity) and it does not correspond to a uniform approach to language studies. It is however striking that much resonance is given in lexical studies to what could be called lexical contextualism, a radical conception by which words do not have meaning of their own, and by which only contexts “give meanings” to words. This position has many non-trivial implications on lexicographic methodologies, language teaching strategies, and even on the very acceptance of core notions such as polysemy. The goal of this paper is twofold. First, it characterizes lexical contextualism: the axioms it is based on and its implications on lexical studies. Second, it tries to provide explanations for why lexical contextualism can appeal to many in their attempt to account for how words convey meanings.
منابع مشابه
6 Contextualism in Epistemology and the Context- Sensitivity of 'knows'
The central issue of this essay is whether contextualism in epistemology is genuinely in conflict with recent claims that ‘know’ is not in fact a contextsensitive word. To address this question, I will first rehearse three key aims of contextualists and the broad strategy they adopt for achieving them. I then introduce two linguistic arguments to the effect that the lexical item ‘know’ is not c...
متن کاملThe Scope and the Subtleties of the Contextualism-Literalism-Relativism Debate
In recent years, a number of new trends have seen light at the intersection of semantics and philosophy of language. They are meant to address puzzles raised by the context-sensitivity of a variety of natural language constructions, such as knowledge ascriptions, belief reports, epistemic modals, indicative conditionals, quantifier phrases, gradable adjectives, temporal constructions, vague pre...
متن کاملContextualism and Conceptual Disambiguation
I distinguish between Old Contextualism, New Contextualism, and the Multiple Concepts Theory. I argue that Old Contextualism cannot handle the following three problems: (i) the disquotational paradox, (ii) upward pressure resistance, (iii) inability to avoid the acceptance of skeptical conclusions. New Contextualism, in contrast, can avoid these problems. However, since New Contextualism appear...
متن کاملNonindexical contextualism
Philosophers on all sides of the contextualism debates have had an overly narrow conception of what semantic context sensitivity could be. They have conflated context sensitivity (dependence of truth or extension on features of context) with indexicality (dependence of content on features of context). As a result of this conflation, proponents of contextualism have taken arguments that establis...
متن کاملContent, Context and Composition
In the recent debate on the semantic/pragmatic divide, Herman Cappelen and Ernie Lepore (2005) on the one hand, and François Recanati (2004) on the other, occupy almost diametrically opposed positions as regards the role of semantics for communication, while largely agreeing on important features of pragmatics. According to Cappelen and Lepore (CL), semantic context sensitivity of natural langu...
متن کامل